visitors is that they go away taking a better understanding with the broadest and the breadth of issues impacting both the asian and latin communities here in california and how they spell out into the larger fabric of the communities we live and work in.

supervisor mirkarimi: good morning. welcome to the public safety committee of the board of supervisors. i am ross mirkarimi, chair of the public safety committee. joining us is supervisor cohen. supervisor campos will be joining us shortly. thank you to sfgtv for their ongoing excellence. madam clerk, please read the first item. >> item 1, ordinance amending

the san francisco police code section 1,215.2 to modify their requirements for the chief of police to refer applications for commercial parking permits to the municipal transportation agency for review of traffic impacts. supervisor mirkarimi: i see we have a representative from mta. please come forward. you might want to go to that microphone. >> good morning, supervisors. i am the city traffic engineer. this is a technical amendment to the police code in regards to parking lot and parking garage permits. as part of the legislation passed by the board of supervisors last year, these were transferred over to the police department. our agency started receiving these permits earlier this year. in january, we received a large

volume of permits, and we have agreed to this amendment that would make the transfer of permits for mta review optional based on chief of police or police department recommendations. i think this is a way of making the process more streamlined for the applicant and also for city staff. it is one we have also worked with the city attorney's office on, making this ordinance. supervisor mirkarimi: ok, all right. is there any other revision on the cost to make it more streamlined, or did that remained unchanged? >> that would be unchanged. our agency was not part of the permit fee process, so we were not charging a fee or receiving part of the fee. we were reviewing it as part of our mta cost, so there should be no cost either in the fee or to the police apartment. there will be reduced costs. right now cut -- or to the

police department. there will be reduced cost. >> -- supervisor mirkarimi: do you know what the population is of the permits that are being applied or have been given out right now? >> i do not have that information. in terms of the number of permits? supervisor mirkarimi: yes. >> from what is -- from what i have seen in my office, it is bent over 500 so far. some of that may be because the police department is processing renewals and new requests, but it is a large volume of paperwork, and we were not able to review all these permits and did not feel that it was necessary for us to review them. supervisor mirkarimi: very good. further discussion? ok, thank you very much. public comment on this? seeing none, public comment is

closed. i will take a motion for moving this forward with recommendations. very good. so moved. madam clerk, item two, please. >> item two, resolution approving a memorandum of understanding with the cities of oakland and san jose and the counties of alameda, contra costa, marin, monterey, san mateo, santa clara, and sonoma that provides government structures and procedures for application, allocation, and distribution of federal urban areas security initiative grant funds as well as other federal. grant funds to the bay area urban area as permitted under the mou and continues san francisco as the primary grantee and agent for the uasi grant funds for the bay area urban area as well as for other grant funds to the bay area urban area as permitted under the mou. >> good morning, supervisors. i am with the department of

emergency management. the item before you today is the 2011 memorandum of understanding. this is a regional organization that distributes homeland security grant funding throughout the bay area. it is chaired by san francisco, specifically by my boss, the director of the department of emergency management. it was formed in 2006, and the board of supervisors approved the original mou to the organization in 2006 and one after that in 2007. this is the third mou for 2011 we're seeking your approval for today. there are a few changes that are significant compared to the previous mou. the main one is that we determined as a body that it is time to expand our membership because this is such a strong regional organization and we rely so much on many of our other regional partners in the bay area, so we are expanding

the membership of the approval authority. we are adding five new members to the approval authority. this mou has a couple of other changes, extending the term of the uasi for a couple more years and directs them to create by loss for the first time. we have never had those before, and it is time. we have written them, and they are ready to go. they are codify that we have those in this mou. the mou also provides more detail on how our partner cities and counties are supposed to meet their regulations. it lays out details for the first time about how you hire and fire a general manager and staff at work for them. there was a staff of employees from san francisco, oakland, santa clara, and some other cities that manages grant funding.

it also establishes procedures for managing the uasi and turning the organization, which we do not anticipate happening, but there should be a procedure, and we put it in place. it took about nine months of san francisco working with our partners in the other counties around the bay area, and we finally approved this. i think in my memo, has said september. it was actually august that this was finally approved. we look forward to the board of supervisors approving this today. it takes effect december 1, and we hope to get this through committee and through the full board with your approval before it takes effect, and i am happy to answer any questions. supervisor mirkarimi: just an example of what the approval is for, the kind of decisions other than the interpersonal with regard to hiring a manager, what kind of decisions as the regional body would be considering. >> that is a good question. the main task that the approval authority is given by the

federal government to give final approval to how their federal grant money is allocated in the bay area. every year, the federal government for a variety of grants gives a chunk of money to the bay area -- we will say the urban area, security initiative grant. they give us roughly around $40 million every year, and it is up to the approval authority to give final sign off on how the money is allocated. some of it goes for projects to benefit the whole region. some of it goes for individual projects for the police department or sheriff's department. the jurisdictions that are members worked together over weeks and months to put together a project proposals, and the staff as a final cut and says which ones need federal by laws and which ones do not, and it falls to the approval authority to make the final decision on how the money will be allocated. that is their main task. supervisor mirkarimi: it had two

votes in the main consoles. is that proportion also reflected in the executive organization? >> it actually is, although it is more because we are the fiscal agent that we tend to have more employees in the executive organization. the general manager is a san francisco employee. we hired him in august. for a long time, he was a senior employee at the assessors office, and he has great expertise in executive management, financial management, and personal management. we insisted on that because we are the fiscal agent. we want one of our city employees to be the fiscal manager since our city manager is legally responsible for these funds. we think that has been for the good of san francisco. i would say at least half of the employees on staff over there are from san francisco. there are others from other cities as well. supervisor mirkarimi: what can

we look forward to? a lot of this is about preparation, being ready, being alert. what i emergency preparedness for man-made or natural disasters, what have you, can we look forward to in the next year? i know there's always drills. there's always these kind of simulations that occur that try to unite the different agencies in different emergency scenarios. what changes now as we -- i am sure we are looking for new scenarios or new kinds of challenges to test ourselves by. >> absolutely. i will put a caveat in that the ways we spend the money are directed by the federal government, so we have to spend it in ways they tell us are okay, but you are right -- we are always looking for emerging threats and new challenges to be prepared for, and one of the best ways to do that is to bring law enforcement agencies together and be sure they are practicing communicating and talking so no matter what comes up, they have relationships with

each other and know how to talk to each other. i will put two things out there -- we recently finished our annual law enforcement exercise that happens every october. police and sheriff's departments from around the bay area and even internationally -- we had a team from israel come. they are here for three days, and the practice different scenarios so they know how to respond and work well together for whatever challenges arise in the future. another major focus is interoperable communications. i know we have talked to you extensively about that. we are trying to build a radio system so that police, fire, and share can talk to each other and not just share voice but share data. we talk on our smartphones and blackberrys. we want law-enforcement to have this capabilities so they can look at the video of a crime scene or a fire in progress or a look at a mug shot, and that will allow them to better handle whatever disasters arise.

supervisor mirkarimi: great. any further discussion? seeing none, public comment? no public comment. why don't we take this with a recommendation, advanced to the full board? so moved. thank you very much. appreciate it. is there any further business before us? >> no, mr. chairman. supervisor mirkarimi: all right. one of the shortest meetings in our history. this meeting is now adjourned. have a good day.

♪ >> hello, and welcome to the

department of elections right choice voting instructional video. it is part of the department of elections right choice voting outreach campaign and is designed to educate san francisco rig franciscoht choice voting. today we will learn what it is and who is elected using this voting method. we will also talk about with the ranked joyce l. looks like and how to market correctly. finally, we will see how the ranked joyce voting process works and to you an example of an election using ranked choice of voting. so, what is ranked joyce voting? in march 2002 san francisco voters adopted a charter to implement ranked choice of voting, also known as instant runoff voting. san francisco voters will use it to elect most local officials by selecting a first choice candidate in the first column on

the ballot and deborah second and third choice candidates in the second and third columns resect to do -- respectively. this makes it possible to elect local officials with the majority of votes. more than 50% without the need for a second runoff election. in san francisco, ranked choice of voting is for the election of members of the board of supervisors, the mayor, sharon, just -- district attorney, city attorney, treasurer, this is a recorder, and public defender. ranked joyce voting does not apply to elections for local school and community college board members. number the election of state or federal officials. ranked choice of voting does not affect the adoption ballot measures. when voters received their ballot, either at a polling place or an absentee ballot in the mail, it will consist of multiple cards.

voters will receive cards with contests for federal and state offices, as well as for state propositions and local ballot measures. for ranked choice voting contest, voters will receive a separate ranked choice ballot card. it will have instructions to rank three choices, which is new. the ranked choice ballot is designed in the side by side column format that lists the names of all candidates in each of the three columns. when marking the ranked choice ballot, voters elect their first choice in the first column by completing the aero pointing to their choice. for their second choice, voters selected different wind by completing the arab pointing to their choice in the second column. for their third choice, voters elect a different candidate by completing the arrow pointing to their choice. voters wishing to vote for qualified write-in candidate can

write it in on the line provided. and they must complete the arrow pointing to their choice. keep in mind, it voters should select a different candidate for each of the three columns of the ranked choice ballot card. if the voters elect the same candidate in more than one column, his or her vote for that candidate will count only once. also, a voter's second choice will be counted only if his or her first choice candidate has been eliminated. and a voter's third choice will be counted only if both his or her first and second choice candidates have been eliminated. we have talked about how to mark the ranked choice ballot. now let's look at how ranked choice of voting works. initially, every first choice vote is a candidate. any candidate that receives a majority, more than 50% of the first choice to vote, is

determined to be the winner. if no candidate receives more than 50% of the first choice votes, a process of eliminating candidates and transferring votes begins. first, the candidate who received the fewest numbers of first choice votes is eliminated from the race. second, voters who selected the eliminated candidate as their first choice will have their vote to transfer to their second choice. there, all the votes are recounted. fourth, if any candidate receives more than 50% of the votes, he/she is declared the winner. if no candidate receives more than 50% of the vote, the process of eliminating candidates and transferring votes is repeated until one candidate has a winning majority. now let's look at an example of an election using ranked choice of voting. in this example, we have three

candidates. candidate a, b, and c. after all the first choice votes are counted, none of the three candidates has received more than 50%, or a majority of the first choice vote cast. candidate a g-205% ofb the votes% received 40%. and c received 35% of the boats. because no candidate received a majority, the candidate who received the fewest number of first choice votes, a candidate a, is eliminated from the race. voters to pick a candidate a as their first choice candidate will have their but transferred to their second choice. and the voters to pick and a, 15% chose candidate b as their second choice, and 10% chose c as their second choice. these votes are then applied to b and c, and the votes are

recounted. candidate b now has 55% of the votes. candidate c as 45%. candidate b has more than 50% of the votes and is determined as the winner. >> thank you for watching. we hope you have ranked choice learned ranked choice of voting and was elected. you have seen the ballot, learned how to market, and learned how the voting process works. if you have any further questions about ranked choice voting, please contact us at department of elections, city hall, room 48, 1 dr. carlton be good lit place, sentences go, california, 94102. or 415-554-4375. visit our website, www.sfelections.org.